Agentage MCP Catalog
Server Details
Search the official MCP registry: 15k+ servers with categories, stars, tools, install config.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.7/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.
Each tool has a distinct and clearly defined purpose: facets for filter values, get for full record retrieval by exact slug, search for discovery and filtering. No overlap in functionality.
All tools follow a consistent catalog__<verb> pattern (facets, get, search), which is clear and predictable.
Three tools perfectly cover the essential operations for a read-only catalog: discover filters, search, and retrieve full details. No wasted or missing tools.
The tool surface covers the full search and retrieval lifecycle: discover available filters (facets), search for servers, and get full details. There are no obvious gaps given the read-only scope.
Available Tools
3 toolscatalog__facetsList directory filter valuesARead-onlyInspect
List the directory's available filter values - every category, language, and license, each with how many servers carry it. Call this BEFORE catalog__search when you intend to filter, so you pass exact, existing values for the type/category/language/license arguments instead of guessing. Takes no input. Read-only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| licenses | Yes | SPDX licenses and their server counts |
| languages | Yes | Repository languages and their server counts |
| categories | Yes | Category labels and how many servers carry each |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false; description confirms 'Read-only' and adds that it takes no input and returns counts. No contradictions, and adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Description is three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidance, then a short note. Every sentence is essential and free of fluff.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no parameters and existence of output schema, description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, and its read-only nature. No gaps.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters exist; schema coverage is 100%. According to rule, 0 parameters yields baseline 4. Description does not need to add parameter info, but it mentions output details which is acceptable.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states the verb 'List' and resource 'directory filter values', specifying categories, languages, and licenses with counts. Distinguishes from sibling catalog__search by explicitly stating it should be called before searching to obtain exact filter values.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this BEFORE catalog__search when you intend to filter'. Implies when not needed (if not filtering) and alternatives (catalog__search, catalog__get) are clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
catalog__getGet one MCP serverARead-onlyInspect
Fetch the complete record for ONE MCP server in the agentage directory by its exact slug: full description, categories, the packages and remote endpoints it ships, the tools it exposes, a ready-to-run install command, and a README excerpt. Use this after catalog__search to get the depth a result card omits - pass a slug exactly as returned by catalog__search, never a guessed or constructed one. No slug yet? call catalog__search first. Read-only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | The exact slug of one server, taken verbatim from a catalog__search result (do not guess or construct one). |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Canonical directory page for this server |
| name | Yes | |
| slug | Yes | |
| stars | No | |
| title | Yes | |
| tools | Yes | The MCP tools this server exposes, from its live tools/list |
| install | No | The recommended way to run this server, derived from its first package/remote |
| license | No | |
| remotes | Yes | |
| category | Yes | |
| language | No | |
| packages | Yes | |
| description | Yes | |
| is_official | Yes | |
| readme_excerpt | No | First ~2000 chars of the README; open url for the full document |
| transport_types | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and destructiveHint. Description adds 'Read-only' and lists return contents, matching annotations. No contradictions; useful context beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, each sentence necessary. No fluff, highly efficient.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With output schema present, description need not detail return values. Lists what is included. For a single-param tool with strong annotations, description is fully adequate.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with a description for slug. Description reinforces that slug must be exact from catalog__search, adding value by preventing incorrect usage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states it fetches the complete record for ONE MCP server by slug, listing included fields (description, categories, packages, endpoints, tools, install command, README excerpt). Distinguishes from sibling catalog__search by emphasizing depth.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly instructs to use after catalog__search, to pass slug exactly as returned (no guessing), and to call catalog__search first if no slug. Provides alternatives and constraints.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
catalog__searchSearch the MCP directoryARead-onlyInspect
Search the agentage MCP directory - a public catalog of Model Context Protocol servers crawled from the official registry - for servers matching a keyword, optionally narrowed by type, category, language, or license. Use this FIRST whenever the user wants to discover, find, compare, or pick an MCP server ("is there an MCP for X", "which MCP servers do Y"). Returns a ranked page of lean cards (slug, name, description, stars, category, transport). To read one server's full packages, tools, and install command, call catalog__get with a slug from these results; to learn which category/language/license values exist before filtering, call catalog__facets. Read-only - never installs or runs anything.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Optional. 1-based page number; defaults to 1. Use pagination.total_pages to page. | |
| type | No | Optional. Restrict to one distribution type: npm | pypi | oci | mcpb | nuget, or "remote" for hosted (HTTP) servers. Omit to search every type. | |
| limit | No | Optional. Results per page; defaults to 20, capped at 50. | |
| query | Yes | What to search for - a keyword, product, capability, or server name (e.g. "github", "postgres", "web search"). Matched across names, titles, and descriptions. Prefer a single distinctive term over a long phrase. | |
| license | No | Optional. Restrict to an SPDX license id (e.g. "MIT", "Apache-2.0"). Exact; call catalog__facets for valid values. Omit for no license filter. | |
| category | No | Optional. Restrict to one category label. Must be an exact value from this taxonomy - call catalog__facets to see the categories that actually exist with their counts. Omit for no category filter. | |
| language | No | Optional. Restrict to a repository language (e.g. "TypeScript", "Python"). Exact, case-sensitive; call catalog__facets for valid values. Omit for no language filter. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | The query the backend actually ran |
| results | Yes | |
| pagination | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: 'Read-only - never installs or runs anything' reiterates the readOnly hint authoritatively. It also describes the return format ('ranked page of lean cards...') and mentions pagination via parameters. The description is consistent with annotations and adds useful detail.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise (6-7 sentences) but packs essential information. It is well-structured: first sentence states purpose, second gives usage direction, third describes output, and subsequent sentences guide next steps. No filler; every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool’s complexity (7 parameters, 1 required, enums, output schema), the description is complete. It covers the tool's role, when to use it, filter options, return structure, pagination (via page and limit), and how to proceed with siblings. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to detail return values, but the description still gives a useful summary.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds value by explaining the purpose of optional filters in natural language and giving query examples ('e.g. 'github', 'postgres''). It also advises using single distinctive terms. This contextual information helps the agent choose effective parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: searching the agentage MCP directory for servers matching keywords with optional filters. It uses specific verbs ('search', 'discover', 'find'), names the resource ('MCP directory'), and distinguishes from siblings (catalog__get, catalog__facets). The scope is well-defined.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides explicit guidance: 'Use this FIRST whenever the user wants to discover...' and specifies when to use siblings ('To read one server's full... call catalog__get; to learn which... call catalog__facets'). This effectively tells the agent when to use this tool versus alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!